Conflict Model Essays

How far were citizenship rights a cause of the conflict between Sinhalese and Tamils in Sri Lanka? Explain your answer.

Citizenship rights were an important cause of conflict between Sinhalese and Tamils in Sri Lanka. However, there were also other causes such as jobs in the government service and university admission criteria.

Citizenship rights were a cause of conflict in Sri Lanka as in 1948, Sri Lanka granted citizenship only to those who were either born in Sri Lanka or those whose fathers and grandfathers were born there. Many Indian Tamils who were brought from India to work in the tea plantations of Sri Lanka suddenly found themselves stateless. Even after the late 1980s, the Sri Lankan government did not keep to its agreement with India to grant citizenship to all the Tamils. Hence, the stateless Tamils felt discriminated against as they were denied voting rights despite contributing to the Sri Lankan economy. As such, this began to sow the seeds of discord between Tamils and Sinhalese.

The ‘Sinhala Only’ Policy was also a cause of conflict. After gaining independence, the government made Sinhala the only language of administration, depriving the Tamils of government jobs or promotion. So, the loss in jobs resulted in a loss of livelihood and the Tamils felt very angry at this policy of discrimination. Feeling oppressed as the laws were always changed to advantage the Sinhalese, the Tamils decided to turn to violence to solve their problems.

After 1970, the university admission criteria was changed to favor the Sinhalese over the Tamils. Tamils students had to score higher marks to enter university. This racial discrimination led to unhappiness and discontent amongst Tamil youths. Being treated as second class citizens and when their demands were not met, hostility worsened and it escalated into armed conflict.

The loss of job opportunities resulted in a loss of livelihood. Being discriminated as second class citizens, is not as critical as the loss of livelihood. A livelihood is far more important than a sense of belonging as the Tamils needed to survive to fight for their rights. So, the loss of jobs was a more important cause than denial of citizenship rights, which only affected a minority group.

 

Do you agree that foreign intervention was the most damaging consequence of ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka? Explain your answer.

I agree that foreign intervention was a damaging consequence of the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka as the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka attracted an outside party in the form of India. In 1983, India acted as the mediator but it failed as the Tamils and the Sinhalese could not come to an agreement. But in 1987, India interfered directly by sending ships of Jaffna laden with food and supplies for the Tamils. The Indian Air Force also violated Sri Lankan airspace by dropping supplies in Jaffna. Finally, in 1990, the Indian peacekeeping forces withdrew after fighting with the Tamil Tigers since 1987. Foreign intervention from India could actually have been the most damaging if it had accelerated and managed to overrun and take over Sri Lanka.

I have to disagree however that foreign intervention was the most damaging consequence. I would argued that armed conflict and economic consequences were more damaging. Since the Tamils have been treated as second class citizens, they asked for a separate state in 1976. Rejected, a militant group, the LTTE resorted to violence and became terrorists. They started attacking Tamils who did not support their cause as well as the Sinhalese. There were many anti-Tamil riots led by the Sinhalese community and army. Many lives were lost and much property was destroyed. Apart from violence, there was hostility, hatred and distrust. Economic consequences are equally damaging: loss of foreign investments and jobs as well as tourism earnings. In times of terrorism and political instability, who would want to invest or take a holiday in Sri Lanka? The standard of living became so hampered when many became unemployed due to the violence.

As such, I disagree that foreign intervention was the most damaging consequence as the Indian peacekeeping forces left in 1990. With armed conflict, Sri Lanka was always remain a poor developing Third World Nation with a damaging impact on the country and its economy and people whereas with foreign intervention, India did give aid in the form of food and supplies to the Tamil regions.

 

How important was the education system in bringing about the Protestant-Catholic conflict in Northern Ireland? Explain your answer.

The education system was an important factor that brought about Protestant-Catholic conflict in Northern Ireland but there were also other factors such as divided loyalties and voting rights.

The education system is a cause because Protestants go to government-funded public schools while the Catholics go to private schools. The damaging consequences of such a segregated education system led to differences because of different opinions taught in both systems. The children rarely get to mix and this perpetuated prejudice, hatred and distrust over the years, widening the divide between the two groups.

Divided loyalties were such that most Protestants regard themselves as British whereas the Catholics see themselves as Irish. This difference in belief is the basis for the tension as the people do not see themselves as part of the same country. The Protestant do not want a union with Ireland as they imagined that a Catholic government would not be tolerant of their protestant beliefs. On the other hand, the Catholics want to be reunited with Ireland as they resent the English conquest of the Irish in the 12th century. This sense of loyalty to different countries caused the Protestants and Catholics to be intolerant of each other.

Prior to 1968, voting rights were such that the protestants had more votes but this is no longer a problem since 1968 as everyone is now only entitled to one vote. Initially, the Catholics were very upset as voting rights were biased against them and only favored the Protestants. Tension created as 1969 led to armed conflict.

Divided loyalties was more important than the education system as education may be revamped but how can a country remain peaceful if the people do not see themselves as part of the same country? Having different beliefs and practice led to divided loyalties  and so this became the most important factor for this tension.

‘The Catholics had no choice but to use violence through the IRA in their fight for more equality.’ Do you agree? Explain your answer.

I agree that the Catholics had no choice but to use violence as the British army intervened in 1969 and the Catholics thought that they would be protected but they were left shocked as their homes were searched and suspects arrested. In 1972, Bloody Sunday marked the  turning point in this conflict. The British soldiers fired shots into the peaceful civil rights march. Thereafter until today, more violence was used and more innocent people died in these clashes because at this point in time, the Catholics had no choice but to turn to the the IRA, an illegal armed organization, for help. They became so desperate as the British Army often raided their homes and damaged their property.

However, I disagree that the Catholics had no choice because there are other means apart from violence in a people’s fight for more equality. Peaceful means like negotiations and peace accords may be used instead of violence and terrorism. However, it must be said that it is very difficult to achieve equality - whether by peaceful or violent means. THe Catholics could have used negotiations or peace accords by turning to the British parliament in London or to the UN to voice their discontent instead of turning to the IRA for help. That was the signal to an end to any successful peace agreements. The Catholics had tried using the peaceful means through the Civil Rights Movement and protest marches in the beginning but there was no response. 

Finally, I disagree that the Catholics had no choice as there is always an alternative to violence. Violence should never be an option. The Catholics could have made greater efforts at peaceful conciliation. They could have made the British government give Catholics a sense of ownership and belonging to the country.